Introducing... Apple Translate!You're not using google translate I hope. It never really comes out right.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Accuses Samsung's Version of Android and the Galaxy Note 10.1 of Infringing Patents
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
FK Apple
I truly hope samsung turns around or some how fks Apple right in the core.
this is all BS, waist of time the legal system
I truly hope samsung turns around or some how fks Apple right in the core.
this is all BS, waist of time the legal system
Its not false advertising lol its just the stupid union of 2 names
Roxxette would be considered feminine. So why use a feminine name when you are a man?
It copies because it works on a mobile device. Apple don't just make these pointless and BS claims for nothing you know. Next they are going after Sir Isaac Newtons family for copying a name.
Yes I did read what you said.
This is a forum. Opinions are posted on forums for debate, and there will be people who dont agree with you. Deal with it.
I can see this ending badly for Apple.
A public traded company whats to stop Samsung for buying up their shares and then making a hostile takeover.
Samsung is a very big company, they have the funds, I love my macbook and iPad but its gonna end in tears..
bit of trivia
oh just found out that Samsung has the Royal warrant not to shabbie for a company that apparently makes cheap knock off goods.
(and for those who think Royal Warrants dont mean to much outside the UK check to see how bigger a deal it is in your country) i.e. Tabasco has the Royal Warrent made in the US and their bloody proud of it
A public traded company whats to stop Samsung for buying up their shares and then making a hostile takeover.
Samsung is a very big company, they have the funds, I love my macbook and iPad but its gonna end in tears..
bit of trivia
oh just found out that Samsung has the Royal warrant not to shabbie for a company that apparently makes cheap knock off goods.
(and for those who think Royal Warrants dont mean to much outside the UK check to see how bigger a deal it is in your country) i.e. Tabasco has the Royal Warrent made in the US and their bloody proud of it
Apple isn't the only company that sues in the mobile industry, so they aren't completely to blame for all this distrust between companies.
A lot of the patents that they argue over are for little things that hardly make a big enough difference for the end user to notice anyway. Unless an Android phone comes out with an exact copy of iOS then what's the point really? To give the legal team something to do?
I've played around with 4.1 Jellybean and it is nothing like iOS. A completely different operating system. My personal opinions of which is the better OS aside this seems petty.
Same goes for ALL companies suing each other in this industry. Forget trying to stop other manufacturers selling their products and embrace the competition. Let technological enhancement be more important and strive to make the better product.
A lot of the patents that they argue over are for little things that hardly make a big enough difference for the end user to notice anyway. Unless an Android phone comes out with an exact copy of iOS then what's the point really? To give the legal team something to do?
I've played around with 4.1 Jellybean and it is nothing like iOS. A completely different operating system. My personal opinions of which is the better OS aside this seems petty.
Same goes for ALL companies suing each other in this industry. Forget trying to stop other manufacturers selling their products and embrace the competition. Let technological enhancement be more important and strive to make the better product.
I have to agree. Whilst my usage of 4.1 has been only in the emulator for development, it's a very different OS to iOS. Really not comparable at all anymore.
At this time I dont personally feel either OS is 'better' than the other one as both have good and bad points.
So you are so foolish as to believe that Apple legal does care what you think?
You think Apple legal is monitoring these forums and looking for postings by rmwebs to get a feel for what the masses think? Then they can change their policy regarding patent infringement to be more in line with your thinking? Dream on.
It also brings out the trolls who calls anyone a 'troll' if they say anything critical about apple, no matter how legitimate it is.
By the way, hotshot, how's your aapl stock doing these days?
A good thing we're not discussing stealing here. Patent infringement is not about theft, it's not about copying. A lot of folks are just plain confused about what can constitute patent infringement.
Even Apple has been found guilty of patent infringement, on multiple occasions. Patents, especially utility patents in the software world, are easily infringed upon because no direct theft or copying is required. You don't even have to know about a patent to infringe on it, unlike copyright (which is about wholesale copying or "theft" if you will, taking what belongs to others).
----------
Theft is conscious, you go out and grab something that is not yours unlawfully. Piracy of media is also not theft, it's copyright infringement.
Patent infringement can occur without even knowing about the claimant's existence, much less their patents, their technology, their research or their dogs.
When Apple did Visual Voice Mail, are you saying they stole it from Klausner ? Are you saying Apple stole GSM from Nokia ? Are you saying Apple stole the UI for the iPod from Creative Labs ?
Of course not. That's just daft, an oversimplification of things for simple minds, those that can't really grasp the fundamentals of product development or plain old software development.
The best example anyone can give of patent infringement : Classroom assignments. 30 students, 1 assignment. Baring any direct copying (copyright infringement), if you seggregate all the students and give them an assignment, make them work on it seperately without letting them discuss it (like an exam), guess what hotshot, I'm sure there's going to be 15 of those solutions to your assignements that are going to be very similar. If the first student to finish "patents" his solution, the 14 others are infringing his patent without even knowing about his work.
That's the ugliness of software/utility patents. Sometimes, some solutions aren't obvious until you've been asked to solve the problem. But once the problem is defined, the solution to it is pretty much the same everyone would come up with.
Well considering I bought in at $80 and it's now close to $600...I guess I really can't complain.
Please enlighten me, Im not sure what SCO is.
SCO tried to ascertain copyright claims against the Linux kernel, trying to extort a 699$ licensing fee for every installation of Linux. They did manage to catch a few fish.
They sued IBM in hopes of a big payout after IBM stiffed them on something called Project Monterey and moving all their efforts off of traditionnal Unix to a Linux solution. It backfired on them when Novell filed lawsuit over copyright misuse, since Novell were the actual owners of the Unix copyrights SCO was trying to claim were theirs.
Novell eventually won the first trial and the re-trial, multiple appeals, etc.. and thus SCO never owned the copyrights it claimed Linux infringed on. All the while, with IBM in discovery, SCO never actually revealed what actual code they were claiming as infringing, even after being asked repeatadly. It was later discovered they had almost nothing. I think 1 item out of a meager list was the file errno.h which they claim was a verbatim lift from AT&T's SysV Unix, but the Linux file is actually different and the parts that are "similar" are simply for POSIX compatibility (It's hard to define EACCESS's value other than #define EACCESS value), thus deemed as not copyrightable.
It's a long case spanning close to a decade.
Actually, it's more "I have a theme park, and I invented some cool new rides that people could only ride at my park, so they came here. But the other parks are now copying my rides and I'm losing business as people can go there instead." and someone replying "Big deal -just invent new rides." to which the answer should be "How about I get exclusive use of the rides that I invent and they go invent their own cool rides?"
Please enlighten me, Im not sure what SCO is.
A rather litigious manufacturer of Unix operating systems just like Apple, who also thought just like Apple that they could litigate their way into owning everything including in SCOs case the Unix trademark and the rights to every Unix like OS out there. What Apple will also find out is that this kind of litigation doesn't work.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SCO_v._IBM
No one knows who or what SCO is and IBM continues to go about its business. Apple are heading down the same pathway at the moment. They need to spend more money on R&D which they're good at and less time on these things that don't really matter.
Last edited:
hahaha, and since when did a giant logo on a deice ever stop Apple from suing the device fore 'apparently' breaching it's design patents? I mean I know in the UK at least the judge was capable of reading the Samsung name on the front, and then the giant Samsung name on the back, but the US judges and Jury seemed incapable of such a thing? Perhaps they couldn't read? But it makes a potent point doesn't it, a giant logo has on a device has had apparently no baring on the outcome of the trial in some instances..
Love these threads.
People sue Apple = Too right
Apple sue people = Apple are childish.
Yawn fest!
Apple sues a tiny family owned coffee shop in the middle of now where because it dared use an Apple as it's logo... Apple ARE childish!
I am going to guess you are being sarcastic in your reply?
I wouldn't be surprised if Apple sues all other computer manufacturers because they DO still include DVD drives in their machines, Apple will most likely claim it's 'not as cool as them' and thus drags down the image of the PC market..
Yeah that sounds daft but remember, Apple likes to Think Different
I can't wait to see if they drop the DVD drive from the next Mac Pro, imagine a $3000 plus machine with no DVD drive...